Reader Comments

A post to acknowledge and answer some of your comments.

First, a thank you to Christopher Paquette for sending this Lego version of the Van Ess Saigon evacuation picture (above).

The Church at Rancho de Taos post received a strong reader response. Adams was the clear winner, followed by Strand. I think this was a smart consensus. I also received the picture below from Christopher Marquez at the Andrew Smith Gallery in Santa Fe. Can you guess who it’s by? Answer at the bottom.

A reader named James asked if I had any opinion on tilt shift photography. I like it a lot when done skillfully. Miklos Gaal, Vincent Laforet, and Olivo Barbieri (see below) seem to be among the best practitioners largely because it seems integral to their vision. But when it’s just a gimmick to try and improve an otherwise dull picture it seems gratuitous.

Miklos Gaal

Vincent Laforet

Olivo Barberi

PRICING PHOTOGRAPHS

There was also a request for some helpful advice on how to price photographs. Here’s how I do it. Gather all relevant information. Is there any past pricing to go by? Does it seem right, high, or low? If there’s no direct relevant information look for something similar or equivalent. Is the picture a large scale small edition print or a small scale open edition print? What is the cost of production?

Are you selling directly or through or a dealer. I would say that a reasonably made print of a good image by a serious photographer shouldn’t go for less than $500. The current record for a contemporary piece is in the seven figures but that’s a limited edition print, a signature piece, by a renowned artist. (We’re talking the Prince, Struth, Gursky class here.) So there’s a big range. Depending on your personal philosophy (and financial situation), you can decide whether to err on the side of underpricing or overpricing – but if you trust your gut you’ll probably come up with the right price. The one piece of pricing advice I always give to photographers is: don’t be afraid to sell out an edition. First, it rarely happens. Secondly, if it does you’re a success! Thirdly, you should always have your artist’s proof. And lastly, if you’re any good, there should always be more sale-worthy images in the pipeline.

MORE TAOS

A good response from readers sending in their own Taos photographs:

Here and below - two ironic views taken by Robert Wright showing how it is today.

This from "The Cool Sisters".

David Gardner focused on a side door.

Mark Harmel found a nice play of shadow and form.

And lastly, the Church at Taos surprise answer:

Weekend Video

Over a year ago, rumors began to circulate that the $75 million dollar film of “Where The Wild Things Are” was in trouble. Directed by Spike Jonze, with a script by Dave Eggers, monsters from the Jim Henson company, and music by Karen O (of the Yeah Yeah Yeah’s), the film adaptation of the Maurice Sendak children’s classic had intriguing creative/hipster potential. But the word was that it too dark and scary and the actor playing the mischievous Max had failed to impress the brass at Warner Brothers. Test screenings were reputedly disastrous.

It’s now slated for an October 2009 release, but if the above trailer is anything to go by, it certainly looks visually impressive. I’m keeping my fingers crossed.

Fairey Update

I don’t know if anyone is dying for a Shepard Fairey update but here’s the latest.

Because of my involvement with the Fairey/Garcia/AP case, I have now been served a subpoena by Fairey’s lawyers and will shortly be deposed. This means gathering every piece of paper relating to any of the above and then being questioned and recorded under oath. No big deal, just a pain.

By coincidence, I happened to be in Boston today and thought I should visit Shep’s show at the ICA. As I have always maintained, I’m actually a fan of Fairey’s work (just not his image “borrowing”) and it’s an amazing show. Beautifully and thoughtfully conceived and installed and full of good work. If you’re anywhere nearby go and see it.

As many of you know I enjoy taking pictures in museums and it always seems silly to me to not allow photography. At this show, however, the young guards were trained with what seemed like military precision - always on the move, crossing from one gallery to another in a way that never left a room unguarded. It was eerie and ironic. But not quite as hypocritical as the sign that greets you as you’re about to enter the show requesting “Please no photography in galleries”!

So in true guerilla spirit, I had to snap at least one with my iPhone:

If all this wasn’t enough, last week I got an e-mail from the film-maker and journalist, Edward Nachtrieb. As Nachtreib explained:

Exactly 20 years ago I took this picture of an armed Chinese soldier at the onset of martial law in Beijing. That same image, with no attachment to its original context or how it fits into the Chinese story, was appropriated by artist Shepard Fairy (of the Obama "Hope Poster" fame).

Beijing residents, using busses and their bodies, had blocked a convoy of soldiers attempting to enter the city. This was the first appearance of lethal weapons on the streets and was a precursor of what was to come on June 4. I'm sure the reality of the picture is not relevant to the artist...but I find that disturbing. Images stripped of their context but retaining strong emotional elements are hallmarks of fascist and Soviet propaganda styles - an acknowledged inspiration for this artist. In this case, I think a lack of accurate context for the image drains it of meaning. It's also dishonest. I suggest that Mr Fairey credit those whose materials he uses to "inspire" him. The truth of things might help enhance the depth of how his work is perceived and actually make it more interesting to contemplate and not just cool to look at.

Inside Fairey’s ICA show, one of the wall texts proudly quotes Warhol saying “Art is anything you can get away with.” This is one of many things the court will have to decide in the Fairey/AP case.